Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 00/13] convert AML API to QOM

[Andrew Jones]

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 10:03:24AM +0000, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> 
> Example demonstrates use of QOM object for building AML
> objects tree and freeing it explicitly when requested.
> 
> Top level ACPI tables blob object is only partially
> switched to object model now but I hope it demostrates
> the point of absracting code and hiding parts of code
> that could be done without user intervention.
> 
> Pathes 1/2/8 are just a convertion boiler plate which
> will go away on respin.
> 
> 
> Igor Mammedov (13):
>   convert to passing AcpiAml by pointers
>   make toplevel ACPI tables blob a pointer
>   qom: add support for weak referenced object: aka UnownedObject
>   acpi: make AcpiAml an OQM object
>   acpi: use TYPE_AML_OBJECT inside of AML API
>   acpi: use TYPE_AML_OBJECT for toplevel ACPI tables blob
>   acpi: make toplevel ACPI tables blob a dedicated object
>   i386: acpi: hack not yet converted tables calls to deal with
>     table_data being a pointer
>   acpi: add aml_blob() helper
>   i386: acpi: add DSDT table using AML API
>   acpi: acpi_add_table() to common cross target file
>   acpi: prepare for API internal collection of RSDT entries
>   i386: acpi: mark SSDT as RSDT entry so API would add entry to RSDT
>     automatically
> 
>  hw/acpi/acpi-build-utils.c         | 537 
> +++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>  hw/i386/acpi-build.c               | 388 +++++++++++++--------------
>  include/hw/acpi/acpi-build-utils.h | 119 +++++---
>  include/qom/object.h               |  20 ++
>  qom/object.c                       |  20 +-
>  5 files changed, 620 insertions(+), 464 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> 1.8.3.1
>

Thanks for doing this. It's satisfied my curiosity as to how
much boilerplate we'd need for the conversion. I looked mainly
at the first half of this series, as it appears the second half
is an add-on, not directly relevant to the explicit memory
management vs. object model memory management discussion. The
additional code, and need for QOM knowledge, appears pretty low.
So, as this would allow developers focused on ACPI table
construction to almost completely avoid doing any memory
management themselves, then, FWIW, it looks like a good trade
off to me.

drew